- From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@allette.com.au>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 03:16:06 +1100
- To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Tim Bray wrote:
>
> The November 14th draft is available in HTML, zipped PostScript,
> gzipped PostScript, zipped RTF, and gzipped RTF, at
>
> http://www.textuality.com/sgml-erb/
Well done.
> For what it's worth, Michael and I are agreed, but the ERB hasn't
> yet considered the question, that the huge list
> of 10646 character roles should migrate into an appendix, with
> a pointer in the main text. Aside from being hideously ugly,
> it breaks up the flow [and also, things that are in the
> appendix don't count against XML's 20-page budget.] Does
> anyone have a reason not to do this? - Tim
Good idea.
The Technical Corrigendum (TC) to SGML on Extended Naming Rules (ENR)
looks like it has succeeded. If so, there is now a legit SGML
declaration possible for defining all those extra name characters,
if they are used. (EditTime editor already handles ENR/Unicode,
if anyone is interested.)
ENR TC is at http://www.ornl.gov/sgml/wg8/document/1896.htm
By the way, if the XML data has been generated valid, am I right
in thinking a non-validing XML parser is completely OK with the robust
and
simple lexical rule that a name is anything up to a delimiter or 's'
(after entity references in (non-CDATA) attribute values have
been resolved)? If so, that should be made clear in the 1.0 spec,
since it drastically simplifies things for implementors.
Also, I think the &u form entities should just have the "u" prefix,
not the "u-" prefix. I don't think it adds anything, and, potentially
add thousands of characters to any entity declarations.
--
Regards
Rick Jelliffe email: ricko@allette.com.au
_______________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia) email: info@allette.com.au
Level 10, 91 York Street www: http://www.allette.com.au
Sydney 2000 NSW Australia phone: +61 2 262 4777
fax: +61 2 262 4774
_______________________________________________________________
Received on Sunday, 17 November 1996 11:12:45 UTC